Curtis Samuel is the real deal.

[Navy_football]

1 hour ago, Mage said:

Dude, what are you talking about?  I already said I'm not arguing Smith > Samuel.  What I'm saying is it isn't as cut and dry as Samuel > Smith either.  Ya'll want Samuel to get more opportunities, but he got an opportunity at the start of the game and dropped it.  I'm not saying that defines him as a player, but I'm saying that maybe, just maybe, he isn't ready to take more of a role yet.  

Smith had started to produce before his injury.  So acting like he wasn't doing anything isn't true.

And why do people keep trying to compare Samuel to Tyreek Hill?  Hill is one of a kind and legitimately a great route-runner.  Not to mention, his speed is out of this world.  Samuel is fast, but he isn't Hill fast, and Hill knows how to separate deep.  Plus, you ignore the fact that SAMUEL HAS BEEN GETTING TOUCHES.  We've found ways to get him the ball.  He's scored 4 touchdowns.  He can't touch the ball every snap, we have too many weapons for that.  So acting like we're just leaving him on the bench and doing nothing with it is, again, not the truth.  

Mage, I am saying Samuel is a more dynamic player than Smith. Just because he dropped one pass, which all of our other receivers have done, doesn't mean he's not ready. He looked like a more talented WR than Torrey to me on Sunday. And for that reason alone, he deserves to play more. Smith may very well be on an upward trend, but his ceiling (in my opinion) is much lower than Samuel's. 

If Torrey comes back and takes touches away from Samuel (because there are only so many balls to go around) then the offense loses potential for a big play. I'm not saying Torrey shouldn't play. He just shouldn't get more targets/touches/ playing time than Samuel.

[Toomers]

13 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

So... you're changing my statement. Samuel's past health issues are valid. Coaches definitely shouldn't compromise his health. I've said that already. I'm not arguing the past, I'm concerned with the future. 

I didn't make an absolute argument about Samuel in Philly. I said "And how do you know if the game would have even been that close (Philly) if Samuel was in?" That is not an absolute statement. 

In other words, how can you say that a player with a higher propensity to make big plays wouldn't have made big plays in the game if given more touches. Therefore making the game not as close?

Torrey should not take touches away from Samuel is my whole concern. Point blank!

You’re not worried about the past but your first post is

 

I'll take two or three losses in September/October if it means we'll be a better team in December/January.

 

so which is it? The only one changing your story is you. With every new post. 

  And Samuel had the potential to have made more mistakes as well. You seem to only want to consider your best case scenario that fits your narrative. 

  And the absolute is your assumption that Torrey will play more than either WR, ever again. You’re basing your argument about something that hasn’t happened by acting as if it did. If you don’t care about the past?

[Toomers]

21 minutes ago, CamandLuke159 said:

The DB slipped... lol 

And your point is? Try hard. Form a sentence. Make an actual statement. 

[TheSpecialJuan]

yee